Friday, December 21, 2012

We all fell for the futuristic leap, until we realized it was fake. Peel away the layers of steroid magic and what’s underneath is a con. That’s why an admitted user such as Mark McGwire won’t get my vote. Nor will Alex Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez and Rafael Palmeiro, ever. Still, it’s not up to the Baseball Writers’ Association of America to police the rest of the field; that’s Bud Selig’s job.

If he’s not going to block Bonds and Clemens – if the commissioner isn’t even willing to affix an asterisk next to their achievements – then let’s stop trying to parse the circumstantial evidence. Let’s move on, and in the spirit of amnesty, induct Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson, as well. Yes, both. It’s time.

In 20 or so years we’ll remember this as the Steroids Era, the same way the early 1900s is viewed by historians as the Dead Ball era. The records of these time periods will be viewed accordingly; Bonds’ 762 homers will be as cartoonish as Cy Young’s 511 victories.

Already, to many, Hank Aaron, not Bonds, is the all-time home run leader. If we’re lucky, the record will someday be broken by someone who’s above suspicion. Until then, we’ll live with an imperfect sport, reflected by my choices in this imperfect ballot.

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

According to baseball-reference.com, Trammell’s 67.1 WAR is fourth among eligible players not in the Hall.

Larry Walker is third (69.7) and is not on his ballot.

Too bad Trammell was overshadowed by Cal Ripken and Paul Molitor.

I never thought of Trammell being overshadowed by Molitor since they never played the same position. I think he was hurt by being a contemporary of the best fielding shortstop ever (Ozzie), one of the best power hitting shortstops of all time (Ripken), another slam dunk HOF shortstop (Larkin), and by being eligible for the Hall when guys like Derek Jeter were active. In another era, Trammell seems like a pretty good HOF case, especially if he wins that MVP he was robbed of.

The records of these time periods will be viewed accordingly; Bonds’ 762 homers will be as cartoonish as Cy Young’s 511 victories.

That's the first time I've seen that comparison made, and it seems pretty apt.
I don't deny Young's record, but I realize it is from a different time, and if that's how people view Bonds' record (legit, but with circumstances), that's not so terrible.

I never thought of Trammell being overshadowed by Molitor since they never played the same position. I think he was hurt by being a contemporary of the best fielding shortstop ever (Ozzie), one of the best power hitting shortstops of all time (Ripken), another slam dunk HOF shortstop (Larkin), and by being eligible for the Hall when guys like Derek Jeter were active. In another era, Trammell seems like a pretty good HOF case, especially if he wins that MVP he was robbed of.

I remember people saying he was the 3rd best Shortstop in his division, behind Ripken and Yount.

This logic makes no sense. He won't vote for guys who admitted taking PEDs or tested positive, but the whole era will be known as the steroid's era, which he seems to be okay with because it will put accomplishments in context. And Bonds' record is an absurd reflection of the era, a claim that implicitly admits that Bonds took PEDs, but Bonds shouldn't be kept from the hall because he never came clean or tested positive.

People who admitted use or tested positive during the Steroids Era should not be allowed in, but the man whose record embodies the era and who had a whole book written about his use of PED's shouldn't be blocked?

By calling it the Steroids Era, he is admitting that a lot of people were using and the players should be judged in that context. Why does eligibility hinge on getting caught?

Funny a guy with 7 names on his ballot is doing a 'small ballot'. Nice to see Raines there too. None of his 7 seem like poor candidates (ala Jack Morris and Lee Smith, or previously guys like Jim Rice and Bruce Sutter) and three are guys who haven't gotten the support they should've over the years (Raines, Trammell and Martinez).

Is it just me, or have there been very few Biggio votes? I'm sure he's not in any danger of falling off the ballot, but given the 3000 hits, I'm stunned I'm not seeing his name more.

Yeah, I'm really surprised too. I thought he was odds on to make it on the first ballot. But clearly he isn't if folks like Klapisch aren't voting for him. He must be getting hurt by being compared to even greater deserving HoFers on the same ballot.

Eh. Palmeiro's a fine candidate, but I easily take Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Bagwell, Biggio, Schilling, Trammell, McGwire ahead of him. Then you've got two spots for Edgar, Sammy, Raffy, Raines, Walker. Walker's the best of that group. Sosa's the worst. So it's one of three. I'd probably go Raines or Edgar ahead of Palmeiro on the merits. And with a cluttered ballot, some strategic thinking is justified - Raines and Edgar could go into the Hall someday with the right campaign, Palmeiro's never getting in on the writer's ballot.

EDIT: Or were you saying that the ballot should have enough space on it to vote reasonably for a reasonable HoF candidate like Palmeiro? In which case, I agree.

In 20 or so years we’ll remember this as the Steroids Era, the same way the early 1900s is viewed by historians as the Dead Ball era.

I remember being about 7 years old and wondering just why this guy's nickname was Frank "Home Run" Baker when he could only hit 12 Home Runs. Gorman Thomas could do that by the break easy. I suspect at the same time I thought the Dead Ball Era meant ball players that were dead.

1) Larry Walker is no kind of stretch for the Hall of Fame. He has a fully deserving HoF peak (three MVP quality seasons in '94, '97, and '01), a great combination of all-around hitting, baserunning, and defense. Basically, he's a better version of Dwight Evans. I'd take Walker easily over Lofton, Sosa, and Palmeiro.

2) Jack Morris is stretching a lot. I see basically no gap between his case and Chuck Finley's. He just pitched for better teams.

3) I'd just put Bernie Williams in the "stretching a little" group. If his defense was acceptable rather than bad earlier in his career (which was closer to the consensus evaluation at the time), there's not too much separating him a Murphy or McGriff.

Misirlou, how do you get Wells as multiple tiers below Morris? You can make the argument that Morris's 400 extra innings cancels out Wells's slightly better run prevention and postseason advantage, but I see no way to get Morris two tiers up on him.

Yeah, I think that's right. First, he's got 46 WAR which is right in Puckett's range. Second, he's got 60 oWAR. That's 6 more oWAR than Edmonds in 1000 more PA; 10 more oWAR than Dawson in 1000 fewer PA. If you're willing to overlook his defensive shortcomings (or simply don't believe they existed ... he did win 4 GG) he's a very viable candidate.

EDIT: Also McGriff -- if his career had started about 5 years earlier, he'd have gone in the way Rice and Dawson did.

If you're willing to overlook his defensive shortcomings (or simply don't believe they existed ... he did win 4 GG) he's a very viable candidate.

Bernie was an obvious defensive liability after the knee and shoulder injuries took their toll, but he was perfectly cromulent early in his career in an "outrun his mistakes" sort of way. But yeah, 60 oWAR. I don't mind people ragging on his defense so much, but it sure would be nice if his hitting got the credit it deserves.